(January 12, 2018 at 10:57 am)Hammy Wrote: I agree that the fact our decisions are predetermined doesn't mean they don't exist.
However if our 'choices' are ultimately entirely caused by events entirely beyond our control... would it really make much sense to call them 'choices'?
We could call them choices because that's what we've always called them. Thales thought water was a fundamental substance, as did others who followed him. Later on we learned that water was merely a composite of hydrogen and oxygen. But that doesn't make it "not water." It simply means water is not fundamental.
In the same way, we used to think of a "choice" as being fundamental--causa sui. Incompatibilists understand that the causes of a choice are not founded in the self, but rather come about due to causes beyond the agent's control. "Choice" is simply a concise way to describe a complex phenomenon of stimulus response.
Quote:The key difference between fatalism and determinism is not a difference in responsibility and choice. In either case we have no responsiblity and choice. The key difference is that the fatalist irrationally pretends like our actions and mental events aren't part of the causal stream when they obviously are. Our future actions will be entirely caused ultimately by events entirely beyond our control but they won't be caused regardless of what we do.
What we do still matters. It's just that ultimately... it's not us doing it.
Well said.
